I bet he's been laughing to himself at how easy it is to get paid for letting AI do all the work - and now he got caught. With any justice, he'd be fired, but let's face it, I'm sure he's not the only one.
Demoralizing is the word! Along with lazy and idiotic. Isn't there (wasn't there) a world where you could be fired for this? He could have researched this article by asking AI to generate 10 major book publicists, email a media query, and have your prepared promos of varying word lengths within 24-48 hours.
It’s pure laziness + I read another piece where he mentioned it’s not his primary job. It’s a side hustle. That tells you everything: He compiled it by using AI, probably uncharged them, and didn’t give it another thought.
It's appalling on every level - that he using AI in place of writing and "research", that newspapers without book editors are recommending books, and that not only did he use it - he didn't check it! A six year old knows AI makes things up. So - no he didn't "research" it - he used a prompt. That's not research.
You are in an unenviable position like most stock brokers. You are paid up front to connect MS to publisher (or if published, to stores, reviews, interviews, etc) as a broker is paid to grow portfolio value. If you fail, or the portfolio shrinks, payment has already been made "for effort" (presumably) even tho there are no (or negative) results.
Entering into such a business model automatically opens you to client criticism over what is not in your control. I wish you good luck and a thick skin. 🍀🍀🍀🍀
This is tangentially related, another way AI is screwing content creators over — I got an email from google about their new-ish AI chatbot Gemini and decided to have an argument with it about how Google is scraping content from individual creators for use in their "AI overviews," without permission or compensation. The chatbot admitted to everything I accused Google of doing, going into a fair amount of detail; then I copied it into a document and sent to the law firm where I'm joining a class action suit against Google. If these AI companies won't listen to reason, they need to be held accountable for stealing content (whether they make a mess of it or not; and thereby, revenue) from those who did the work to create the "helpful content" they themselves are demanding.
Two years ago, I asked Chat GPT about me and it understood I was a writer, but it said I'd written books I hadn't - including one by Isabel Allende. It gave me a "great career." Marco's inappropriate use of ChatGPT to generate a reading list reminds me of my inappropriate placement of a book that the reviewer had panned as #1 on the "Critics Commend" list at the LA Times Book Review ... I almost got fired ... but Art just took the column away from me. If Marco had to produce 64 pages in 2 days, I'm guessing that's why he made that terrible choice. Me? I was just 19 and hung over. https://open.substack.com/pub/amysterling/p/it-helps-to-have-a-great-boss?r=b8rzz&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
The sleep I used to lose when certain authors would be like "well did you follow up? Why didn't they say yes? Can you try again? What if I ask my cousin's niece's daughter's son who knows the editor, surely they'll do it then?" The frustrations over the way I was treated by authors, and not being properly supported by my superiors, was one of the main causes of my burnout and subsequent leaving the industry. Not all authors, mind you, but the share that did were awful.
I'm also so furious at his blase "fauxpology." If AI is doing this for big name authors, what about smaller to mid-list authors? What about the general public who have seen this debacle from far and wide (it's made it onto the local news here in Australia), and then the next time they walk into a bookstore see, say, Migrations on the shelf and go, "oh that's the AI book, I won't buy that." And he says "oops, it's so surreal to see!"
This is almost more about the publication than it is about Marco. They allowed it, they put their imprimatur on it, and it's NOTHING like what I used to do many years ago (see above). Shameful.
He really thought he'd get away with it.
Unbelievably awful. 😞
Thank you for writing this!
This is mind blowing and hilarious and awful and telling and I hope that "writer" never gets paid to "write" anything ever again.
I bet he's been laughing to himself at how easy it is to get paid for letting AI do all the work - and now he got caught. With any justice, he'd be fired, but let's face it, I'm sure he's not the only one.
I can guarantee he’s not the only one.
So wild that someone getting paid would AI-generate a list of books when others, like me, would write an actual list just for fun!
Demoralizing is the word! Along with lazy and idiotic. Isn't there (wasn't there) a world where you could be fired for this? He could have researched this article by asking AI to generate 10 major book publicists, email a media query, and have your prepared promos of varying word lengths within 24-48 hours.
It’s pure laziness + I read another piece where he mentioned it’s not his primary job. It’s a side hustle. That tells you everything: He compiled it by using AI, probably uncharged them, and didn’t give it another thought.
Ugh. I'm so sorry.
It's appalling on every level - that he using AI in place of writing and "research", that newspapers without book editors are recommending books, and that not only did he use it - he didn't check it! A six year old knows AI makes things up. So - no he didn't "research" it - he used a prompt. That's not research.
You are in an unenviable position like most stock brokers. You are paid up front to connect MS to publisher (or if published, to stores, reviews, interviews, etc) as a broker is paid to grow portfolio value. If you fail, or the portfolio shrinks, payment has already been made "for effort" (presumably) even tho there are no (or negative) results.
Entering into such a business model automatically opens you to client criticism over what is not in your control. I wish you good luck and a thick skin. 🍀🍀🍀🍀
Omg this is so awful!
This is crazy!
Here are links to what the Chicago Sun-Times published this morning (May 21, 2025).
https://chicago.suntimes.com/press-room/2025/05/20/chicago-sun-times-response-to-may-18-special-section
https://paper.suntimes.com/html5/reader/production/default.aspx?pubname=&pubid=09af93ab-fa0a-4724-88e1-d3357b312cf3
Great -- and appalling -- story, Kathleen. Question: What did the newspaper editors have to say about it? What are they going to do about it?
This is tangentially related, another way AI is screwing content creators over — I got an email from google about their new-ish AI chatbot Gemini and decided to have an argument with it about how Google is scraping content from individual creators for use in their "AI overviews," without permission or compensation. The chatbot admitted to everything I accused Google of doing, going into a fair amount of detail; then I copied it into a document and sent to the law firm where I'm joining a class action suit against Google. If these AI companies won't listen to reason, they need to be held accountable for stealing content (whether they make a mess of it or not; and thereby, revenue) from those who did the work to create the "helpful content" they themselves are demanding.
Two years ago, I asked Chat GPT about me and it understood I was a writer, but it said I'd written books I hadn't - including one by Isabel Allende. It gave me a "great career." Marco's inappropriate use of ChatGPT to generate a reading list reminds me of my inappropriate placement of a book that the reviewer had panned as #1 on the "Critics Commend" list at the LA Times Book Review ... I almost got fired ... but Art just took the column away from me. If Marco had to produce 64 pages in 2 days, I'm guessing that's why he made that terrible choice. Me? I was just 19 and hung over. https://open.substack.com/pub/amysterling/p/it-helps-to-have-a-great-boss?r=b8rzz&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
The sleep I used to lose when certain authors would be like "well did you follow up? Why didn't they say yes? Can you try again? What if I ask my cousin's niece's daughter's son who knows the editor, surely they'll do it then?" The frustrations over the way I was treated by authors, and not being properly supported by my superiors, was one of the main causes of my burnout and subsequent leaving the industry. Not all authors, mind you, but the share that did were awful.
I'm also so furious at his blase "fauxpology." If AI is doing this for big name authors, what about smaller to mid-list authors? What about the general public who have seen this debacle from far and wide (it's made it onto the local news here in Australia), and then the next time they walk into a bookstore see, say, Migrations on the shelf and go, "oh that's the AI book, I won't buy that." And he says "oops, it's so surreal to see!"
This is almost more about the publication than it is about Marco. They allowed it, they put their imprimatur on it, and it's NOTHING like what I used to do many years ago (see above). Shameful.